From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1753045AbZEaUEW@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753045AbZEaUEW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 31 May 2009 16:04:22 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752715AbZEaUEN
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Sun, 31 May 2009 16:04:13 -0400
Received: from cpsmtpm-eml104.kpnxchange.com ([195.121.3.8]:56969 "EHLO
	CPSMTPM-EML104.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752638AbZEaUEM (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 31 May 2009 16:04:12 -0400
From: Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>
To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] partitions/ide: improve Host Protected Area handling
Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 22:04:11 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9
Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, "Andries E. Brouwer" <Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@gmail.com>,
       Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
References: <20090531143911.7164.26834.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <20090531143911.7164.26834.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200905312204.12549.elendil@planet.nl>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 May 2009 20:04:13.0183 (UTC) FILETIME=[F7DE88F0:01C9E22A]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sunday 31 May 2009, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> Since from the perspective of most users of recent systems, disabling
> Host Protected Area (HPA) can break vendor RAID formats, GPT partitions
> and risks corrupting firmware or overwriting vendor system recovery
> tools this patchset makes the IDE subsystem preserve HPA by default.

Kudos! I have to leave a real review of the patches to others more 
qualified than me, but where the previous patch set raised all sorts of 
questions for me, this just looks logical.

I conclude the following from reading the patches:
- a HPA is always at the end of a disk, correct?
- the only case where a user should notice a change after switching
  to 2.6.30 is if he has a partition that starts on or after the
  start of the HPA: such a partition will be ignored (with warning
  in dmesg); I guess that is reasonable as at least it will prevent
  "broken" partitions and is probably relatively uncommon.

Thanks for your continued work on this Bart.

Cheers,
FJP